RMS2, this is probably mostly for you but I'd appreciate any input from anybod who knows how project admins do things and how other testing companies show up in projects and Ysearch.

I've been trying to keep track of L21* folks that I can find in FTDNA projects and in Ysearch. I've already had a "learning experience" (in other words I was wrong on something.) I am finding quite a number of people insert they are R1b1b2a1b5* (R-L21*) in Ysearch that don't appear to be tested for it.... or they may just be other testing companies work.

I also find that FTDNA project admins will sometimes categorize things in R-L21* categories based on haplotype matches (or something else).

On the other hand, I don't recall every seeing a "red" R1b1b2a1b5 predicted designation in an FTDNA project. In other words, FTDNA does not feel comfortable making R1b1b2a1b5 predictions yet.

The following are in the R-L21+ project and have been promoted beyond the "unassigned" as R1b1b2a1b5 by FTDNA (which means FTDNA does not consider them confirmed L21+ with M222-.)

Should these all be considered "good" R-L21* folks? I think in some cases they are from another company so they actually are confirmed but just now showing that way? Anyway to tell by looking at the records?

Do other FTDNA project administrator follow any particular guidelines when presuming a deep clade?

RMS2, this is probably mostly for you but I'd appreciate any input from anybod who knows how project admins do things and how other testing companies show up in projects and Ysearch.

I also find that FTDNA project admins will sometimes categorize things in R-L21* categories based on haplotype matches (or something else).

On the other hand, I don't recall every seeing a "red" R1b1b2a1b5 predicted designation in an FTDNA project. In other words, FTDNA does not feel comfortable making R1b1b2a1b5 predictions yet.

Do other FTDNA project administrator follow any particular guidelines when presuming a deep clade?

As you know, I am the co-admin for the Wales project. That is the only project I administer where I have to worry about grouping clades.

I have yet to see FTDNA predict L21*.

I cannot tell if someone has tested with another company. People have sent me copies of results from other companies; that's the only way I would know. But none of them are in my Wales project.

I try to be careful to only put a non deep-clade tested person in with tested ones if they share the last name and the same markers and same ancestor, BUT you should always check with me if you have a question about a certain individual "in red" that I have grouped in a subclade. (I know we've already discussed this a bit in the past).

What I like is that as a group admin, I can use FTDNA's predictor to see how close everyone in the project is to each other. Not that it's very accurate (in my opinion), but it's better than doing my own math, heaven forbid!!! :-)

It's virtually impossible to predict L21+ until some of these cluster definitions become "bullet-proof".

Many of those profiles have been tested S145+ by EthnoAncestry, L21+ by Genebase or had a 'G' result for rs11799226 on a 23andMe test.

Whalen, Durall and Reynolds were a few of the 23andMe guys, with results provided on Adriano Squecco's spreadsheet. Adriano cross-references them with Y-search IDs when available.

Previously I, and now Rich, requires some kind of proof of result from another company if they don't have an L21+ result from FTDNA, such as a screen-shot image or a copy of the test result certificate or other documentation, before they get categorized.Without that certificate, there is no way of validating the L21 status of a haplotype profile unless it is unambiguously connected to an FTDNA profile that has been SNP tested.

Of course, on very rare occasions, you could run into a guy like me that has an incorrect green haplogroup assignment.

It's virtually impossible to predict L21+ until some of these cluster definitions become "bullet-proof".

Many of those profiles have been tested S145+ by EthnoAncestry, L21+ by Genebase or had a 'G' result for rs11799226 on a 23andMe test.

Whalen, Durall and Reynolds were a few of the 23andMe guys, with results provided on Adriano Squecco's spreadsheet. Adriano cross-references them with Y-search IDs when available.

Previously I, and now Rich, requires some kind of proof of result from another company if they don't have an L21+ result from FTDNA, such as a screen-shot image or a copy of the test result certificate or other documentation, before they get categorized.Without that certificate, there is no way of validating the L21 status of a haplotype profile unless it is unambiguously connected to an FTDNA profile that has been SNP tested.

Of course, on very rare occasions, you could run into a guy like me that has an incorrect green haplogroup assignment.

Are the people in the beginning of this topic in the R-L21Plus project all of those type who were tested by 23andMe or some other service? Are any just close haplotype matches but truly untested?

Is there a good way to contact Adriano Squecco to get a copy of his L21+ folks on his spreadsheet?

It's like Vince said. When people join who don't have an L21+ result from FTDNA, I always ask them how they know they are L21+, and they send me evidence from Ethnoancestry (mostly), 23andMe, or Genebase.

As you know, I am the co-admin for the Wales project. That is the only project I administer where I have to worry about grouping clades.

I have yet to see FTDNA predict L21*.

I cannot tell if someone has tested with another company. People have sent me copies of results from other companies; that's the only way I would know. But none of them are in my Wales project.

I try to be careful to only put a non deep-clade tested person in with tested ones if they share the last name and the same markers and same ancestor, BUT you should always check with me if you have a question about a certain individual "in red" that I have grouped in a subclade. (I know we've already discussed this a bit in the past).

What I like is that as a group admin, I can use FTDNA's predictor to see how close everyone in the project is to each other. Not that it's very accurate (in my opinion), but it's better than doing my own math, heaven forbid!!! :-)

Susan

In the Wales DNA project, among others, there are the 17-14-10 group 1 (Wales Modal 1 - S9R4J) which also includes the Pugh folks,the Cadwgon group 2 (Wales Modal 2 - WFF6T),and the 11-13 Combo group 3 (Wales Modal 3 - KEFGX).

Are those the right Modal ID's that you are using? I think Robert Hughes set them up.

Each of these three groups has some R1b1b2a1b5 (tested) people. Are you declaring, or what criteria would we need to meet to declare odds are very, very high that if you fit this you are R-L21*?

Do we have other people with close GD's out there in Ysearch or anywhere that are tested L21-?

In my group, group 3, you have this guy listed.168 9083 Henry Morgan b. 1825, Pontypool, Wales R1b1b2a (tested)How does one end up with "a" hanging on the end? Does this mean he has a test in progress and he is P310+ but they haven't finished the P312 and L21 testing?

Also, in the general Wales R-L21* group, you have one guy showing up141 85941 Lewis ap Thomas, ca 1500, Crickhowell, Wales [L21] R1b1b2 (tested) but not R1b1b2a1b5 (tested). Is is a high match or did you determine he is L21*.

In the Wales DNA project, among others, there are the 17-14-10 group 1 (Wales Modal 1 - S9R4J) which also includes the Pugh folks,the Cadwgon group 2 (Wales Modal 2 - WFF6T),and the 11-13 Combo group 3 (Wales Modal 3 - KEFGX).

Are those the right Modal ID's that you are using? I think Robert Hughes set them up.Yes, Kristen Saxe (WTY project) and I are both using Robert Hughes' three "Wales" modals from Y-search for these groups/clusters.

Each of these three groups has some R1b1b2a1b5 (tested) people. Are you declaring, or what criteria would we need to meet to declare odds are very, very high that if you fit this you are R-L21*?Good question. I ran out of room (only allowed 50 characters including spaces for each group name) to put that only some are confirmed in each group. I have high confidence in the ones where the surname and markers match, otherwise I am trying to get them to test for L21.

Do we have other people with close GD's out there in Ysearch or anywhere that are tested L21-?None in the Wales project.

In my group, group 3, you have this guy listed.168 9083 Henry Morgan b. 1825, Pontypool, Wales R1b1b2a (tested)How does one end up with "a" hanging on the end? Does this mean he has a test in progress and he is P310+ but they haven't finished the P312 and L21 testing?I will have to search my records further, but I believe I was told by someone that he is in your group. Perhaps he is on Robert Hughes' list and that's where I found him. Not that it matters that much; he has ordered Deep Clade testing; results due back July 29th!

Also, in the general Wales R-L21* group, you have one guy showing up141 85941 Lewis ap Thomas, ca 1500, Crickhowell, Wales [L21] R1b1b2 (tested) but not R1b1b2a1b5 (tested). Is is a high match or did you determine he is L21*.He is not interested in doing the L21 test because he matches the other man who has already tested and is in that same group and shares the same ancestor. So, you actually don't need him, as his haplotype is a duplicate of the tested man's. I'm sorry it is sometimes confusing because two (or more) men will tell me they share the same ancestor, yet don't put that info on their own personal pages.